Guest guest Posted February 28, 2000 Report Share Posted February 28, 2000 HOW DO CONTACT PATRICK KENNY Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 29, 2000 Report Share Posted February 29, 2000 Namaste, The URL for it is: http://www.alkhemy.com/sanskrit/doc_z_misc_shankara/doc_z_misc_shankara.html Regards, sunder >K Kathirasan ADM NCS <kathirasan >advaitin >advaitin >RE: The Physics of Realization >Wed, 1 Mar 2000 08:45:42 +0800 > >Namaste Sunder-ji > >In there any website that has the full 10 verses of the dashashlokii and >the >translation as well? A million thanks. > > > > > Sunder Hattangadi [sMTP:sunderh] > > Tuesday, February 29, 2000 9:22 PM > > advaitin > > RE: The Physics of Realization > > > > "Sunder Hattangadi" <sunderh > > > > Namaste, > > > > Adi Shankara is said to have composed the dashashlokii [10 verses] > > when he went to Govindapada seeking intiation, and was asked "Who are > > you?" > > > > The refrain is: "tadeko.avashishhTaH shivaH kevalo.aham.h ." > > > > Regards, > > > > s. > > > > > > > > > > >"Madhava K. Turumella" <madhava > > >advaitin > > >advaitin > > >RE: The Physics of Realization > > >Tue, 29 Feb 2000 15:46:20 +0300 > > > > > >"Madhava K. Turumella" <madhava > > > > > > > ____ > > Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com > > > > > > ------ > > FREE ADVICE FROM REAL PEOPLE! Xpertsite has thousands of experts who > > are willing to answer your questions for FREE. Go to Xpertsite today >and > > put your mind to rest. > > http://click./1/1404/2/_/489436/_/951830532/ > > ------ > > > > Discussion of the True Meaning of Sankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy > > focusing on non-duality between mind and matter. Searchable List >Archives > > are available at: http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ To > > > from the list, send Email to <advaitin- > For >other > > contact, Email to <advaitins > > ____ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 1, 2000 Report Share Posted March 1, 2000 namaste, Re: Harding; Some other experiments are offered at URL: http://www.headless.org/introduction.html There are quite a few other sites, with interviews with him, and a journal also. Regards, s. >"Anand Natarajan" <anandn >advaitin >advaitin >RE: The Physics of Realization >Wed, 01 Mar 2000 08:49:27 -0800 > > ____ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 1, 2000 Report Share Posted March 1, 2000 namaste, Here is a first person account by Harding himself: http://www.sentient.org/amber/douglas.htm Regards, s. >"Anand Natarajan" <anandn >advaitin >advaitin >RE: The Physics of Realization >Wed, 01 Mar 2000 08:49:27 -0800 > > > >Somebody mentioned Douglas Harding. He has an interesting experiment called >"The man without a Head". He asks us to view through our eyes , not >thinking that they are slits on our face , but thinking that we have no >head and that the eyes are huge windows through which everything is seen. >The effect can be very pronounced if this is doen properly. You feel as >though as though you are floating in air. Though this seems like Self >Hypnotism , it is good for starters. > > > Anand > >On Tue, 29 Feb 2000 16:15:02 Chuck Hillig wrote: > > >" The body feels the pain.....not "you." You are Pure Consciousness." > ____ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 1, 2000 Report Share Posted March 1, 2000 Sri Ramana Maharshi once asked someone, "How do you know that you are not realized ?" I like this question very much because we assume we are ignorant and that we seek realization. Sri Bhagavan's question is therefore a missile when he asks us , "You seek realization, But how do you know that you are not Here and Now Realized !". Somebody mentioned Douglas Harding. He has an interesting experiment called "The man without a Head". He asks us to view through our eyes , not thinking that they are slits on our face , but thinking that we have no head and that the eyes are huge windows through which everything is seen. The effect can be very pronounced if this is doen properly. You feel as though as though you are floating in air. Though this seems like Self Hypnotism , it is good for starters. Anand On Tue, 29 Feb 2000 16:15:02 Chuck Hillig wrote: >" The body feels the pain.....not "you." You are Pure Consciousness." A FREE web-based e-mail service brought to you by the PC World Technology Network. Get your FREE account today at http://www.myworldmail.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 1, 2000 Report Share Posted March 1, 2000 >"Anand Natarajan" <anandn > > >Sri Ramana Maharshi once asked someone, >"How do you know that you are not realized ?" Is it possible to be realized without, um, realizing it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 1, 2000 Report Share Posted March 1, 2000 Parisi & Watson wrote: > > "Parisi & Watson" <niche > > >"Anand Natarajan" <anandn > > > > > >Sri Ramana Maharshi once asked someone, > >"How do you know that you are not realized ?" > > Is it possible to be realized without, um, realizing it? remove the negative self-hypnotic impact of the Mind and realization is [everpresent] in its stead! this is what Sri Ramana was alluding to. so, virtually *everyone* is innately *already* Self-realized! OM shaanthi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 1, 2000 Report Share Posted March 1, 2000 On 3/1/00 at 9:15 PM Parisi & Watson wrote: [...] ¤ ¤I understand that, but I would think the point here is not who or what you ¤are, which never changes, but rather whether you _realize_ what you are. You ¤can _be_ something without realizing it (a hero, for instance, to take a ¤more mundane example), but I don't think you can _realize_ that you are ¤something without, in fact, realizing it. Heroes etc. require a definition of behavior and identification with imitation of that behavior whereas "Self" can neither be identified with nor be defined when +known+. The immaterial "quality" however is realized immediately. This has to be discovered experientially, in the sense that one cannot sensibly discuss the song of a kiki bird without having heard it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 2, 2000 Report Share Posted March 2, 2000 Parisi & Watson wrote: > > ... I would think the point here is not who or what you > are, which never changes, but rather whether you _realize_ what you are. You > can _be_ something without realizing it (a hero, for instance, to take a > more mundane example), but I don't think you can _realize_ that you are > something without, in fact, realizing it. this is the common and greatest obstacle diverting--or SEEMING to divert!--our connection to our [everpresent] Self. viz. the idea of Self-realization being a hands-on, concrete-reasonable grasp of the nature of the Self-Being. this is a good example as to why i came to prefer vedanta over other methods pertaining to [albeit equally valid] metaphysical approaches... because it accurately explains/categorizes areas in psychology [that the others either are vague about, or bypass altogether]. this will help set up my point: (taken from an extract from my notes) In Vedanta, one will find a number of ways that mind can be defined and broken down into components having certain characteristics. The most useful, in my opinion, is the following: Overall, within the total field of awareness of the individual is postulated the antahkarana (mechanism housing the four internal organs of perception): 1. manas (thinking; logic); 2. chitta (memory; instinct); 3. buddhi (intuition; discrimination); and 4. ahamkar (ego). my point: the manas/ahamkar is where we ordinarily and *erroneously* believe the advent of realizaton will take place. it *cannot*! it takes place (in the form of a continuum) within the buddhi/ahamkar. i'm sure this will raise eyebrows. mentioning ahamkar. implying that ego remains intact in the process. this relates to what sri patrick was referring to, that the idea of ethics cannot survive in an egoless society. the popular misnomer is that the ego will be utterly destroyed. i disagree. it will be *sublimated*. a semblence of it remains in tact for the jivanmuktha. how else can (s)he function?! this is the purport of the term jivatman (the bridge between jiva and atman), and it will remain...in fact, i believe it remains as long as the manvantara (brahman's leela) is engaged, whether incarnate in a physical vehicle or not. this i believe is part of the [ultimately inscrutable] plan of isvara. however, it really doesn't matter seeing it this way or not. what matters is finding and being the Self. what matters is the ability to belly-laugh at the sometimes colossal terror wielded by the Mind! namaste Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.